Sorenson v. Luebbers

Missouri Court of Appeals

Sorenson v. Luebbers

158 S.W.3d 860, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 450, 2005 WL 701642

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 29, 2005

DocketNo. ED 85633

StatusPublished

This text of 158 S.W.3d 860 (Sorenson v. Luebbers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sorenson v. Luebbers, 158 S.W.3d 860, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 450, 2005 WL 701642 (Mo. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

GEORGE W. DRAPER III, C.J.

Robert Sorenson (Appellant) appeals from a judgment denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Appeal dismissed.

We have a duty to initially determine whether we have jurisdiction. If we lack jurisdiction to entertain an appeal, then it should be dismissed. Fischer v. City of Washington, 55 S.W.3d 372, 377 (Mo.App. E.D.2001). Here, Appellant seeks to appeal from the circuit court’s judgment denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus. An appeal does not lie from the denial of a petition for habeas corpus. Blackmon v. Missouri Board of Probation and Parole, 97 S.W.3d 458 (Mo. banc 2003); McDermott v. State, 120 S.W.3d 261, 262 (Mo.App. E.D.2003).

We issued an order directing Appellant to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed. Appellant has filed a response in which he argues that he has a constitutional right to have the trial court’s ruling reviewed when his rights have been violated. However, even though Appellant may not have the right to appeal the ruling, he has a remedy. A petitioner’s remedy where a petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied is to file a new writ petition in a higher court. Webster v. Purkett, 110 S.W.3d 832, 837 (Mo.App. E.D.2003). Appellant has not filed a new writ petition.

The appeal is dismissed for lack of an appealable judgment.

LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN and GLENN A. NORTON, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

GEORGE W. DRAPER III, C.J.

Robert Sorenson (Appellant) appeals from a judgment denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Appeal dismissed.

We have a duty to initially determine whether we have jurisdiction. If we lack jurisdiction to entertain an appeal, then it should be dismissed. Fischer v. City of Washington, 55 S.W.3d 372, 377 (Mo.App. E.D.2001). Here, Appellant seeks to appeal from the circuit court’s judgment denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus. An appeal does not lie from the denial of a petition for habeas corpus. Blackmon v. Missouri Board of Probation and Parole, 97 S.W.3d 458 (Mo. banc 2003); McDermott v. State, 120 S.W.3d 261, 262 (Mo.App. E.D.2003).

We issued an order directing Appellant to show cause why his appeal should not be dismissed. Appellant has filed a response in which he argues that he has a constitutional right to have the trial court’s ruling reviewed when his rights have been violated. However, even though Appellant may not have the right to appeal the ruling, he has a remedy. A petitioner’s remedy where a petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied is to file a new writ petition in a higher court. Webster v. Purkett, 110 S.W.3d 832, 837 (Mo.App. E.D.2003). Appellant has not filed a new writ petition.

The appeal is dismissed for lack of an appealable judgment.

LAWRENCE G. CRAHAN and GLENN A. NORTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 S.W.3d 860, 2005 Mo. App. LEXIS 450, 2005 WL 701642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sorenson-v-luebbers-moctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack